Francophone Conundrum.

I watched 2 live TV debates on Sunday May 19^th on 2 private TV stations airing from Cameroon: Canal 2 International and Spectrum TV (STV2). On both shows, the topic was national unity and obviously "The Anglophone Problem" crept in. Previously, I found it very difficult to articulate "that problem" satisfactorily. However, I definitely made up my mind after the shows.

Why would the Anglophone Problem come up in a show which focused national unity? Do anglophones threaten national unity? You may debate on the WHY and HOW of the unification and reunification; of who was re-unifying with whom and why; of whether it was a unification or re-unification or even if the event ever took place. Regardless, so long as ONE Cameroonian is labeled "Anglophone" (for whatever reason), you must entertain the possibility that there may be a specific problem which only Anglophones face owing to the history, sociology, ancestry and/or territory. Curiously, on both shows, inasmuch as they both labeled some Cameroonians "Anglophone", the TV stations didn't find it relevant to invite an Anglophone! Surreal as it may seem, this is a reflection of contemporary Cameroon. Suddenly I realized that, maybe the Anglophone Problem is actually a "francophone issue". How do you acknowledge a problem facing some people, yet fail to recognize the people? One reason only; disrespect.

The Anglophone Problem concerns anglophones but it doesn't automatically follow that anglophones have a problem. I don’t think so. “The Anglophone Problem” is the francophone incapacity to distinguish between unification and uniformity. Anglophones didn’t become francophone in 1972 nor do Anglophones  expect francophones to become anglophone any day. We are whom we are.

North Korea has no Nukes!

Recent weeks have played out the strangest display of foolhardiness, blackmail and plain crazy. A supposed nuclear power, North Korea, threatening to blow up the United States and South Korea.

The case for a North Korean nuclear ICBM lacks proof. It goes against all convention. Normally, ICBM capability is "discovered" or communicated, not advertised. Some may argue whether Israel has nuclear capability. Or South Africa or Iran or Pakistan. North Korea is the only country that every advertised its nuclear capability. 

If the past is any indication to go by, North Korean threats of war are overblown. However, the chances that it will conduct another nuclear test are high. And it is gaining ground in its missile program, experts say, though still a long way from seriously threatening the U.S. mainland. "It's not the first time they've made a similar threat of war," said Ryoo Kihl-jae, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul. "What's more serious than the probability of an attack on South Korea is that of a nuclear test. I see very slim chances of North Korea following through with its threat of war."

Consider these facts about nuclear weapons. No nuclear power has ever before threatened another nuclear power with a direct attack. 

My Take
In a very revealing interview by Bill Clinton after he left the White House, the former US President explained how the US purchased North Korean military stockpiles and destroyed them for fear of these weapons (including handguns and grenades) getting into the international black-market. This option practiced by Clinton Presidency was driven by the crudeness of the weapons rather than their tactical impact.

The North Korean nuclear program is the best weapon against itself.

1. It permanently drains their meagre ressources 
2. It guarantees that North Korea is dependent on food aid from its designated enemies (South Korea and USA).
3. It maintains hyper inflation, massive poverty and a permanent brain-drain with North Korean scientists defecting to South Korea. 

Will the US intervene.
No! Similar to WWII where British intelligence concluded that assassinating Hitler will be counter-productive because his generals (Heinz Guderian, Wilhelm Keitel, Erwin Rommel and Gerd von Rundstedt) freed from the overburdening yoke of an erratic civilian dictator could effectively win the war between 1939 and 1942; a US intervention will destabilize North Korea and may create a military vacuum that may forge the emergence of a real military threat to South Korea and beyond. It serves US military interests to keep a twenty-something year old (who is yet to make the difference between video games and war) at the helm.

Predictable Outcomes

 I love some, despise some or live in total indifference to others. My opinions are forged from factual analyses and are completely devoid of emotion or belief.

1. The opinions i hold on individuals will not change when they die (if they die before i do). When I despise you, I really do. Take Chavez's case. I have no respect whatsoever, for any regime or Head of State who modifies the constitution that brought him to power and uses the new one to stay in power. If you don't finish your mission during the required term, YOU FAILED! So don't expect my sympathy for Chavez ... death is not a form of power change.
2. I love Coup d'Etats ... on one condition. That the perpetrator of a coup accept that he is in violation of public code of conduct and he has no right to judge anybody else who plans or executes a coup against him.
3. I am suspicious of all regimes when they go beyond a 2nd Term. 
4. Being irrelevant in politics means you have no solutions for the problems you identified. John Fru Ndi, Julius Malema and Paul Biya are first on my list.
5. I condone the death sentence if it's carried out in public. A sanitised execution is a sign of cowardice.
6. I hold no religious views whatsoever. I respect individuals who believe in God (s) but completely despise their beliefs. 
7. I'm completely indifferent to the Hippopotamus because if you kill all of them, nothing will change.

BOKO "HAREM"

Don't apply any logic tested elsewhere on Cameroon. Cameroon is a dysfunctional state. Study these facts closely. If a family is hijacked "using motorbikes", the 1st doubt you want to clear is how 7 ppl get transported on bikes. One bike is fast, many bikes riding in a convoy with children is a bit of a hassle. Next, the source of that info should be arrested. The amount of detail in the info betrays proximity. Normally kidnap victims "disappear" till further notice. They were kidnapped and taken to Nigeria in a zone where borders are neither marked nor secured means the person giving the information either masters map reading, is using a GPS or has a GSM device with Geo-location capabilities. My take? The french family was kidnapped by Cameroonian thugs and sold to bigger thugs who think the name BOKO HARAM makes the fickle-hearted shudder